• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

詹尼斯群体思维理论中的群体动力学:回顾与展望。

Group Dynamics in Janis's Theory of Groupthink: Backward and Forward.

作者信息

McCauley C

机构信息

Bryn Mawr College

出版信息

Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1998 Feb;73(2/3):142-62. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1998.2759.

DOI:10.1006/obhd.1998.2759
PMID:9705800
Abstract

Janis's groupthink theory is an appealing explanation of how group process can get in the way of optimal decision making. Unfortunately, Janis was selective and not always consistent in his application of research in group dynamics. This paper traces groupthink to its theoretical roots in order to suggest how a broader and more consistent use of research in group dynamics can advance understanding of decision-making problems. In particular, the paper explores and reinterprets the groupthink prediction that poor decision making is most likely when group cohesion is based on the personal attractiveness of group members. Copyright 1998 Academic Press.

摘要

贾尼斯的群体思维理论对群体过程如何阻碍最优决策做出了一种有吸引力的解释。不幸的是,贾尼斯在应用群体动力学研究时具有选择性,且并非总是保持一致。本文追溯群体思维的理论根源,以提出如何更广泛、更一致地运用群体动力学研究来推进对决策问题的理解。特别是,本文探讨并重新诠释了群体思维的预测,即当群体凝聚力基于成员的个人吸引力时,做出糟糕决策的可能性最大。版权所有1998年学术出版社。

相似文献

1
Group Dynamics in Janis's Theory of Groupthink: Backward and Forward.詹尼斯群体思维理论中的群体动力学:回顾与展望。
Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1998 Feb;73(2/3):142-62. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1998.2759.
2
Recasting Janis's Groupthink Model: The Key Role of Collective Efficacy in Decision Fiascoes.重塑贾尼斯的群体思维模型:集体效能在决策失败中的关键作用。
Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1998 Feb;73(2/3):185-209. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1998.2761.
3
Groupthink, Bay of Pigs, and Watergate Reconsidered.对群体思维、猪湾事件和水门事件的重新审视
Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1998 Feb;73(2/3):352-61. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1998.2766.
4
Revisiting the Bay of Pigs and Vietnam Decisions 25 Years Later: How Well Has the Groupthink Hypothesis Stood the Test of Time?25年后重审猪湾事件和越南战争决策:群体思维假说经受住时间考验的情况如何?
Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1998 Feb;73(2/3):236-71. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1998.2762.
5
Preventing Groupthink Revisited: Evaluating and Reforming Groups in Government.《重温防止群体思维:评估与改革政府中的群体》
Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1998 Feb;73(2/3):306-26. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1998.2764.
6
Group Dynamics in Top Management Teams: Groupthink, Vigilance, and Alternative Models of Organizational Failure and Success.高层管理团队中的群体动态:群体思维、警觉以及组织成败的其他模型
Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1998 Feb;73(2/3):272-305. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1998.2763.
7
Alive and Well after 25 Years: A Review of Groupthink Research.25年后依然活跃且发展良好:群体思维研究综述
Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1998 Feb;73(2/3):116-41. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1998.2758.
8
The Tendency toward Defective Decision Making within Self-Managing Teams: The Relevance of Groupthink for the 21st Century.自我管理团队中决策失误的倾向:群体思维在21世纪的相关性。
Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1998 Feb;73(2/3):327-51. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1998.2765.
9
Effects of dominance on group decision making: toward a stress-reduction explanation of groupthink.主导地位对群体决策的影响:朝向群体思维的压力减轻解释
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1985 Oct;49(4):949-52. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.49.4.949.
10
Groupthink among health professional teams in patient care: A scoping review.医患护理中医疗专业团队的群体思维:范围综述。
Med Teach. 2022 Mar;44(3):309-318. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2021.1987404. Epub 2021 Oct 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Groupthink among health professional teams in patient care: A scoping review.医患护理中医疗专业团队的群体思维:范围综述。
Med Teach. 2022 Mar;44(3):309-318. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2021.1987404. Epub 2021 Oct 12.
2
Head Movement Synchrony and Idea Generation Interference - Investigating Background Music Effects on Group Creativity.头部运动同步与创意生成干扰——探究背景音乐对团队创造力的影响
Front Psychol. 2019 Nov 15;10:2577. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02577. eCollection 2019.
3
Metacognitive Myopia in Hidden-Profile Tasks: The Failure to Control for Repetition Biases.
隐藏特征任务中的元认知近视:未能控制重复偏差
Front Psychol. 2018 Jun 5;9:903. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00903. eCollection 2018.
4
How truth wins in opinion dynamics along issue sequences.意见动态中随着议题序列的推移真相如何胜出。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 Oct 24;114(43):11380-11385. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1710603114. Epub 2017 Oct 10.